Making everyone happy is impossible. Pissing them off is a piece of cake. I like cake.

Sunday, April 01, 2012

Watching your fall

This is the massively-foreheaded face of our enemy. And—look!—isn't it a stupid face, a weak face, a detestable face? But don't be deceived—this man holds you all in utter contempt. Mark him: he is the enemy of all free-born British people everywhere.

Early in our interview, he says disarmingly, "I need to say this – you shouldn't trust any government, actually including this one. You should not trust government – full stop. The natural inclination of government is to hoard power and information; to accrue power to itself in the name of the public good."

He hasn't changed his views since we met five years ago when he was home affairs spokesman for his party and I was beginning to get to grips with the attack on liberty and privacy by the Blair government. We were both astonished then at the range, depth and stealth of the campaign and the surprising truth that few people seemed to notice or care about Blair's authoritarian project, which did so much to reduce the citizen's standing in relation to the state. Clegg is passionate on this: "It was the outright derision towards the criminal justice system… and extreme disdain for due process. For Blair the criminal justice system was an impediment to keeping people safe."

Five years after that meeting it seems extraordinary that he now occupies such a pivotal role in government and is in a position to lead the restoration of civil liberties. Were it not for his performance in the TV debates during the election campaign, which put the Lib Dems in the game, and the need for the coalition partners to find areas in which they could bond, it is certain that this Protection of Freedoms Bill would not exist. Although I have some concerns about what has not been included in the bill, it is true that the conditions that brought it into existence are near miraculous.

Yes, that is Henry Porter's interview with Nick Clegg, from February 2011. It is entitled—ironically, it now seems—Why we should believe Nick Clegg when he promises to restore liberties stolen by Labour.

Predictably, the BBC have interviewed David Davis and he is not in favour—although he does not condemn Cameron and his merry band of twats as "a collective sack of shit".

In a couple of decades, when people asked what went wrong with Britain, they will identify David Cameron's victory over David Davis as the decisive factor—when the man of spin won over the man of principle.

And, given the Coalition's activities over the last few months—on booze, and smoking, and surveillance—then I issue this edict: if you are a member of Labour, LibDems or Conservative then you are a traitor and an enemy of the British people.

You have marked yourselves as fit for nothing but a public hanging—and one day we, the people, will ensure that is what you will get.

More than ever before the mainstream party leaders need to be asking themselves why their one time voters have joined the ranks of the 'None of The Above' moment...

Well, Norm: I think that this latest news answers your question—does it not? It is because the Big Three are all the same: they are the enemy class, united in a conspiracy against the ordinary people of Britain.

So why on earth would those same people connive at their own destruction by voting for their executioners—do you think we are stupid...?

Now this may be a coincidence, but don't we have a Data Retention Directive, otherwise known as Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006?

Isn't this the directive which requires member states to oblige providers of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks to retain traffic and location data for between six months and two years for the purpose of the investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime?

And didn't the EU commission last year start a review of the rules, with a view to proposing an improved legal framework? Wasn't that then followed by a proposal for a comprehensive reform of the system?

Then, a few months later, up pops the UK government with some proposals of its own. Are we supposed to believe that this is a complete coincidence? Does anyone believe that, with data retention being an occupied field, the British government is working entirely independently, and has not consulted with the commission on this?

Yup: it seems our Mother of All Parliaments EU regional government is simply obeying the instructions of its puppet-masters. Well, what a surprise.

Anyway, wacko ideas like this and several others have already cemented my belief not to vote for Lab-Lib-Con ever again. The sad fact is the masses still will, occasional anomalies like Bradford West notwithstanding.

If I were a politician id be more than happy to blame the EU. Why are they so happy to take the flak and be Merkel's patsy (I meant patsy not pasty)? It goes against all human instinct. No one takes that sort of shit without a quid pro quo. What's really going on?

Yet more evidence that we should start a campaign to get the law changed for three points:1. All voting papers have a 'NONE OF THE ABOVE' box to tick. 2. Compulsory voting.3. No MP can serve more that one term or parliament. Ever.

Then If the NOTA vote gets within a percentage (to be decided) of the other candidate's combined vote, the election is run again. But this time no one who stood can stand again in that or any other constituency for 5 years.

Of course our government has delivered so many splendid IT projects, all within time and under budget. Of course they'll get this one right too. It will be perfect and all will be serenity and harmony.

Firstly, what they wish to achieve is technically not feasible given the amount of data they're wanting to capture.

Secondly, to sidestep the monitoring all you need is a proxy server outside of the EU's jurisdiction. Whether you rent, buy or steal one it doesn't matter as long as all traffic between it and you is encrypted.

Alternatively, you could just waste their time and money with a suitable footer to your email or sms containing any words that you think they may be interested in: "Heads on spikes" would be my suggestion...

Let's not forget that David Davis brutally whipped the Maastricht Treaty through the Commons for John Major. Without that treaty the EU would never have accreted enough power to bring in these measures. Should we hold this against him? Why not if we still despise Heath and Macmillan etc?

DK - I hope you're thriving. Would Fake Charities be interested in an idea for a microsite?